On WCOA’s “Real News with Rick Outzen,” Supervisor of Elections Robert Bender spoke publicly for the first time since Bruce Childers filed a motion to get put on the August primary ballot. Childers’ motion was denied on Friday.
“The thing I hate most about this is that the integrity of the office was questioned, and the judge denied the motion because she saw that we followed the law,” Bender said. “It didn’t make the decision any easier. I didn’t celebrate any this weekend. As a candidate, it’s not how I want to win. As a supervisor of elections, it’s not how I want my office to be a part of controversy.”
He explained why he refused to give interviews about the Childers’ motions before the hearing. “We just didn’t want to get into a ‘he said, she said.’ They had put their side of the story out. It differed from ours. But again, I couldn’t speak of it firsthand. I wasn’t there. We wanted to let the judge and the court hear our side and make a decision from there.”
Bender has changed office procedures to avoid opportunities for confusion when candidates file and qualify to run in the future.
“No longer will the first check happen with a candidate being right there at the front counter,” the election supervisor said. “Someone will check the paperwork in, maybe give it a cursory overview to see if there’s anything that needs to be done. But the first check and second check will happen away from the front counter, where you can focus on what’s going on. Things won’t be checked until they’re in their hands.”
Bender pushed Attorney Ed Fleming’s insinuation that Bruce Childers was found not qualified to run because the Supervisor of Elections sought revenge for Clerk of Court Pam Childers winning a lawsuit that found the 401a pension plan was illegal.
He said, “I know they want to attack me on the 401a, but I filled out a form that FRS gave our HR department that they gave me. When I found out that it wasn’t the same amount that HR told me, I called payroll and said, ‘Hey, this is more than what they were saying.’ And I was told that the board had voted on it in 2016. I never voted for it.”
Bender added, “Instead of trying to change the amount, we heard it was illegal. And that was why I fought it—I didn’t think it was illegal because the process had been in place since the nineties. But when the ruling came out, we turned it back. We didn’t appeal; we gave it back. My integrity shouldn’t be questioned because I feel I’ve done the right thing every time.”
The Supervisor of Elections doesn’t expect an apology from Bruce and Pam Childers, and he hopes the Clerk’s office will work with his office professionally.
“I want to see us come together and work for the citizens of Escambia County,” Bender said. “Our office had been going into jury duty every Monday morning, and that was cut off over a month ago. We need to get back to serving the citizens of Escambia County.”
Featured Photo by Ian Powell on Unsplash
#notreadbypamchilders
CJ,
Your comments are so uninformed. You missed all the pertient facts, and many of your “facts” have been disproved.
Have a Happy Fourth!
Rick
So, as the story for public consumption goes, Robert Bender is not very actively involved overseeing the operations of his office, Sonya Daniel is serving as the de facto Supervisor of Elections really calling the shots and making the decisions and she and Keelie Sekerka and maybe others all successfully kept Bender in the dark never telling him on any of the key days that Bruce Childers had not submitted a Form 6 ignoring that Daniel and Sekerka had both certified he had. Not really believable. On the other hand, Bender, Daniel and Sekerka all do have an interest in Bender’s reelection. I can imagine them all turning a blind eye until it was too late. Two state handbooks that I have read describe how the qualification process is supposed to work but did not. Has anyone asked to see the documentation of contacts made by Bender’s office with Childers. Ignore Wednesday, June 12th, until the “waiting for an email” storyline is worn out. By Thursday morning, June 13th, Daniel and Sekerka had to know they had not received an email and so no Form 6 from Childers. Then on Friday, June 14th, Bender had to send a report to the Department of State listing the qualified candidates. Is it true that on Friday Daniel and Sekerka had still withheld from Bender that Childers had not submitted a Form 6? That’s the story were expected to believe. Then on Tuesday, June 18th, we’re told that Daniel alone reviewed Childers’ qualifying package. Why? Is there a state law requirement to review qualifying packages “after” a candidate has been certified to the Department of State? I’ve looked at the case law too. I couldn’t find anything just like this SNAFU. Childers should have focused on Bender’s office failing to notify him on Thursday and then challenge his authority to disqualify him. Childers should appeal. Perhaps the 1st DCA or Florida Supreme Court will not go his way but they might point out a legal roadmap for the Florida Legislature to amend state law to include clarifying with specificity the ministerial powers of the Supervisor of Elections and recommending an appeal process to the Department of State if a candidate was not qualified because the Supervisor of Elections failed in some way to perform their constitutional duty.